Quote:
Originally Posted by Nightshade
By that standard, no character generation problems are a problem; after all, the GM can just fix them, right?
|
Um... Yes. It's as simple as saying to the player: "Gee. That new character's going to be underpowered for the adventure I've got planed. Go ahead and tack on an extra 7 or 8 years of experience if you want. Oh, and you're free to change profession to <list of professions> if you want. And if you can qualify along the way, feel free to add initiate experience, just remember to spend a point of power, and choose from one of <list of cults> available in the area...".
Seriously, what is the problem here? How on earth can you expect to run a game if you can't manage that? It's not like you're being asked to re-invent the wheel here. Every single thing in that conversation is common sense, the mechanics for doing it are right there in the rules, and any GM with half a brain shouldn't even have to think twice to manage it.
What do you do when a player wants to do something in a game you're running that you didn't think of and write down ahead of time? Just stand there looking confused and muttering about how there's no written rule for this, so you're not sure what to do? If you can't handle figuring out what to do if a player comes to you with a character that you feel wont fit into the game, I guess I don't know what to say...
Quote:
|
The issue is that there are ways to produce that result without the choice of either using the random tables, or having no one ever chose those professions at all.
|
No. The choice is that you use the random tables as a guide and make any darn adjustments you want. It's not "either/or". The tables are provide in order to give you an idea of what sorts of skills someone actively working in a given profession would be expected to have. As a GM, you never have to use a rule that you don't like, and as a player, you don't have to play in a game you don't like.
Quote:
|
Even RQ2 didn't require it to this degree.
|
And neither did RQ3.
Quote:
|
It was simply poor basic design that served part of its users no better than the RQ1 and 2 methods, and part worse.
|
No. It was vastly better. If you don't see that, then you completely missed the point of the tables. Rolling on them for starting occupation and starting years was only the smallest component to them. The whole point was that you could derive any character based on occupation. You could use them between adventures as a guide for gaining skills when not adventuring. That was certainly an improvement over RQ2.
And yeah. What if I want to generate a group of farmers, or sailors, or thieves? I can do this because I have this set of tables that tell me what skills they'll gain and in what proportions. You're waaaaay to caught up on the whole "OMG! You have to roll random dice to determine your character's starting abilities". If you don't like that, then by all means don't roll randomly.
Those tables have utility well beyond just initial character creation. I'm amazed that you apparently somehow missed that.